Abstract
Many standards exist to formalize legal texts and rules. The same is true for legal ontologies. However, there is no proof theory to draw conclusions for these ontologically modeled rules. We address this gap by the proposal of a new modeling of deontic statements, and then we use this modeling to propose reasoning mechanisms to answer deontic questions i.e., questions like “Is it mandatory/permitted/prohibited to...”. We also show that using this modeling, it is possible to check the consistency of a deontic rule base. This work stands as a first important step towards a proof theory over a deontic rule base.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
Excerpt from Article 10 of arrêté https://tinyurl.com/arrete2002. CROSS is a Regional Operational Centre for Monitoring and Rescue.
- 7.
The prefixes are the following: \(\texttt {owl:<}\)http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl\(\texttt {>}\), \(\texttt {:<}\)http://example.com/\(\texttt {>}\), \(\texttt {rdf:<}\)http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns\(\texttt {>}\), \(\texttt {rdfs:<}\)http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema\(\texttt {>}\), \(\texttt {shom:<}\)http://example.com/shom\(\texttt {>}\), \(\texttt {lrmlmm:<}\)http://docs.oasis-open.org/legalruleml/ns/v1.0/metamodel\(\texttt {>}\),
- 8.
I.e., not the same and not broader than (within the meaning of \(\subseteq ^+\)).
- 9.
The full (French) version of the text is available at https://tinyurl.com/y77x32y3.
References
Gordon, T.F.: The legal knowledge interchange format (LKIF). Technical report, ESTRELLA Project http://www.estrellaproject.org/doc/Estrella-D4.1.pdf
Boley, H., Tabet, S., Wagner, G.: Design rationale of RuleML: a markup language for semantic web rules. In: 1st International Conference on SW Working, pp. 381–401 (2001)
Palmirani, M., Governatori, G., Athan, T., Boley, H., Paschke, A., Wyner, A.: LegalRuleML core specification version 1.0. OASIS Committee Specification Draft 01 / Public Review Draft 01, October 2016
OMG: Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules (SBVR), v1.0. Technical report, Object Management Group (2008). https://www.omg.org/spec/SBVR/1.0/
Winkels, R., Boer, A., Hoekstra, R.: CLIME: lessons learned in legal information serving. In: Proceedings of the 15th ECAI, pp. 230–234. IOS Press (2002)
Valente, A., Breuker, J.: A functional ontology of law. Artif. Intell. law 7, 241–361 (1994)
Gangemi, A.: Design patterns for legal ontology constructions. LOAIT 2007, 65–85 (2007)
Lame, G.: Using NLP techniques to identify legal ontology components: concepts and relations. In: Benjamins, V.R., Casanovas, P., Breuker, J., Gangemi, A. (eds.) Law and the Semantic Web. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3369, pp. 169–184. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32253-5_11
Yurchyshyna, A., Zarli, A.: An ontology-based approach for formalisation and semantic organisation of conformance requirements in construction. Autom. Constr. 18(8), 1084–1098 (2009)
Pauwels, P., et al.: A semantic rule checking environment for building performance checking. Autom. Constr. 20(5), 506–518 (2011)
Kacfah Emani, C.: Automatic detection and semantic formalisation of business rules. In: Presutti, V., d’Amato, C., Gandon, F., d’Aquin, M., Staab, S., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8465, pp. 834–844. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07443-6_57
Hassanpour, S., O’Connor, M.J., Das, A.K.: A framework for the automatic extraction of rules from online text. In: Bassiliades, N., Governatori, G., Paschke, A. (eds.) RuleML 2011. LNCS, vol. 6826, pp. 266–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22546-8_21
Kang, S., et al.: Extraction of manufacturing rules from unstructured text using a semantic framework. In: ASME 2015 American Society of Mechanical Engineers (2015)
Hoekstra, R., Breuker, J., Di Bello, M., Boer, A., et al.: The LKIF core ontology of basic legal concepts. LOAIT 321, 43–63 (2007)
Gordon, T.F.: Constructing legal arguments with rules in the legal knowledge interchange format (LKIF). In: Casanovas, P., Sartor, G., Casellas, N., Rubino, R. (eds.) Computable Models of the Law. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4884, pp. 162–184. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85569-9_11
Boley, H., Paschke, A., Shafiq, O.: RuleML 1.0: the overarching specification of web rules. In: Dean, M., Hall, J., Rotolo, A., Tabet, S. (eds.) RuleML 2010. LNCS, vol. 6403, pp. 162–178. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16289-3_15
Van De Ven, S., Hoekstra, R., Breuker, J., Wortel, L., El Ali, A.: Judging amy: automated legal assessment using OWL 2. In: OWLED, vol. 432 (2008)
Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G., Maher, M.J.: Representation results for defeasible logic. ACM TOCL 2(2), 255–287 (2001)
Searle, J.R.: The Construction of Social Reality. Simon and Schuster, New York (1995)
Acknowledgements
This work is funded by the Service hydrographique et océanographique de la marine (Shom) as part of the reizhmor project.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Emani, C.K., Haralambous, Y. (2019). Deontic Reasoning for Legal Ontologies. In: Hitzler, P., et al. The Semantic Web. ESWC 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11503. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21348-0_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21348-0_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-21347-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-21348-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)